Queer rights are on trial left, right and centre this month.

Here in Canada, an HIV-positive gay couple from the States has won their appeal against Citizenship and Immigration Canada. Until now, the majority of HIV-positive applicants have been excluded because of the excessive burden they posed on health services. This couple was initially rejected, but appealed on the basis that they could afford to cover their own health costs. CIC might still choose to appeal themselves, but the case is still encouraging for future HIV-positive immigrants to Canada — providing they have some cash behind them. Xtra has more here.

Meanwhile at the Ontario Superior Court, an HIV-positive man named Kyle Freeman is challenging the ban on blood donation by gay men. The trial moved to closing comments last week, and a decision is expected in a few weeks. Freeman’s lawyer Patricia LeFebour said in her closing remarks, “The current rule unfairly singles out the entire gay population,” and “doesn’t take into account the reality of today’s HIV statistics of gay men.”

Across the border, an interesting legal challenge has begun against the ban on same-sex marriage in California. Perry v. Schwarzenegger opened on Monday, and there is some speculation that this case may progress all the way to the US Supreme Court. Queer rights groups are divided over whether this would be good news. Some claim public opinion in the US is still deeply divided over gay marriage and for the Supreme Court to rule in its favour would trigger a major backlash. Others think a favourable ruling from the Supreme Court is unlikely, and that an unfavourable one could set the cause back a decade or more. The New Yorker has an interesting piece on the case, and you can also track the progress of the trial at this new Courage Campaign blog.

In Uganda, it is still unclear whether a bill imposing life sentences and even execution for homosexuality will pass into law. President Museveni has intervened, saying that the death penalty is a bridge too far, but the harsh prison sentences may still remain part of the bill. In the meantime though, debate over the bill is stirring up some seriously ugly anti-gay sentiment in the country.

Cate Simpson is a freelance journalist and the web and reviews editor for Shameless magazine. She lives in Toronto.

Cohen’s newest movie, Bruno, to be released July 10th, is well ahead of schedule in creating buzz – and of course, controversy. The movie is the third in a very loosely connected series featuring characters from Cohen’s faux-interview show, Da Ali G Show. In previews, Bruno, a gay Austrian model, makes the rounds of Prop. 8 rallies, baby photo shoots, and anti-gay self-defence courses. Almost as notorious as these early glimpses of the movie itself are the outlandish publicity stunts that have accompanied it – including Bruno posing naked on the cover of GQ or landing on Eminem at the MTV Movie Awards clad only in a jock strap.

Some of this is obviously funny, and some of it so shocking you just have to laugh. Either way, Bruno seems poised to be at least the hilarious hit Cohen’s previous film Borat was. It’s been a long winter full of bad news, and I think most of us are ready for a bleached-blonde, Brangelina-mocking fashion model with a little Ron Paul on the side.

I hate to go further than that. Cohen has already captured the title of the fun, cool, bachelor uncle, and which leaves the rest of the media looking like the chic liberal parent who makes everything oh-so-awkwardly serious. Still, Cohen as much as acknowledges this kind of discussion needs to take place by claiming the film uses humour to ignite debate about racism and prejudice in our society, so let me venture this much.

Without having seen the film, it’s safe to say the movie will play on gay stereotypes. It’s also safe to assume it will give a megaphone to homophobes and bigots they would not otherwise have. The movie doesn’t, as Human Rights Campaign so earnestly requested, come with a warning that the it was “designed to expose homophobia.” And though that would be a tad over-the-top, it’s also too neat and easy to say that people will always figure that out for themselves. There are, I’m afraid, plenty of people stupid or bigoted enough to use the movie to confirm instead of condemn their own prejudices.

Of course, on the other hand, Cohen is right that Bruno will draw attention to some troubling aspects of our society, and that it is more damning and likely to get far more widespread attention than “serious” news coverage – which I’m afraid is a something of an indictment of mainstream journalism as well. That’s more than enough motivation for me to escape my muggy, garbage-perfumed city to sit in a dark air-conditioned movie theatre for a couple hours and laugh without thinking too hard. Let’s make sure it’s also sparks some important discussion, on this blog and elsewhere …